Jump to ContentJump to Main Navigation
Show Summary Details
More options …

Biological Chemistry

Editor-in-Chief: Brüne, Bernhard

Editorial Board: Buchner, Johannes / Lei, Ming / Ludwig, Stephan / Thomas, Douglas D. / Turk, Boris / Wittinghofer, Alfred

IMPACT FACTOR 2018: 3.014
5-year IMPACT FACTOR: 3.162

CiteScore 2018: 3.09

SCImago Journal Rank (SJR) 2018: 1.482
Source Normalized Impact per Paper (SNIP) 2018: 0.820

See all formats and pricing
More options …
Volume 382, Issue 6


Legumain Forms from Plants and Animals Differ in Their Specificity

Vitalie I. Rotari / Pam M. Dando / Alan J. Barrett
Published Online: 2005-06-01 | DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/BC.2001.119


We purified forms of legumain from a plant source (seeds of kidney bean, Phaseolus vulgaris) and a mammal (kidney of pig, Sus scropha) for comparison of their properties. Both forms were found to be stable only under moderately acidic pH conditions, and were maximally active at about pH 6; the plant enzyme was somewhat less stable and had a slightly higher pH optimum. With benzyloxycarbonylXaa AlaAsnaminomethylcoumarylamide substrates, the two forms of legumain showed distinctly different specificities for the P3 residue, the plant legumain preferring amino acids with bulky hydrophobic side chains because of lower K values. Both forms of legumain were highly specific for hydrolysis of asparaginyl bonds in the arylamide substrates and in neurotensin. Aspartyl bonds were hydrolysed about 100-fold more slowly with lower pH optima. Potential substrates containing other amino acids structurally similar to asparagine were not hydrolysed. There were clear differences in specificity of hydrolysis of protein substrates. The plant legumain differed from pig legumain in its action on tetanus toxoid Cfragment, cleaving at Asn[97] but not at Asn[337], and produced more extensive digestion of phaseolin. The plant form of legumain was much more weakly inhibited by eggwhite cystatin than was the mammalian form.

About the article

Published Online: 2005-06-01

Published in Print: 2001-06-27

Citation Information: Biological Chemistry, Volume 382, Issue 6, Pages 953–959, ISSN (Print) 1431-6730, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/BC.2001.119.

Export Citation

Citing Articles

Here you can find all Crossref-listed publications in which this article is cited. If you would like to receive automatic email messages as soon as this article is cited in other publications, simply activate the “Citation Alert” on the top of this page.

Florian B. Zauner, Brigitta Elsässer, Elfriede Dall, Chiara Cabrele, and Hans Brandstetter
Journal of Biological Chemistry, 2018, Volume 293, Number 23, Page 8934
Paula Teper-Bamnolker, Yossi Buskila, Eduard Belausov, Dalia Wolf, Adi Doron-Faigenboim, Shifra Ben-Dor, Renier A.L. Van der Hoorn, Amnon Lers, and Dani Eshel
Plant, Cell & Environment, 2017
Brigitta Elsässer, Florian B. Zauner, Johann Messner, Wai Tuck Soh, Elfriede Dall, and Hans Brandstetter
ACS Catalysis, 2017, Page 5585
Binhui Wu, Jing Yin, Catherine Texier, Michaël Roussel, and Kevin Shyong-Wei Tan
Journal of Biological Chemistry, 2010, Volume 285, Number 3, Page 1790
Antoine Danon, Vitalie I. Rotari, Anna Gordon, Nathalie Mailhac, and Patrick Gallois
Journal of Biological Chemistry, 2004, Volume 279, Number 1, Page 779
Laurent Bonneau, Yuan Ge, Georgina E. Drury, and Patrick Gallois
Journal of Experimental Botany, 2008, Volume 59, Number 3, Page 491
Y Ge, Y-M Cai, L Bonneau, V Rotari, A Danon, E A McKenzie, H McLellan, L Mach, and P Gallois
Cell Death and Differentiation, 2016, Volume 23, Number 9, Page 1493
Daniel Sojka, Jana Pytelková, Jan Perner, Martin Horn, Jitka Konvičková, Jana Schrenková, Michael Mareš, and Petr Kopáček
Ticks and Tick-borne Diseases, 2016, Volume 7, Number 4, Page 604
Elfriede Dall and Hans Brandstetter
Biochimie, 2016, Volume 122, Page 126
Shih-Hsin Chang, Kuang-Yao Chen, and Lian-Chen Wang
Parasitology Research, 2014, Volume 113, Number 6, Page 2143
Zhenya P. Yordanova, Ernst J. Woltering, Veneta M. Kapchina-Toteva, and Elena T. Iakimova
Annals of Botany, 2013, Volume 111, Number 2, Page 191
Enrique Rojo, Raquel Martı́n, Clay Carter, Jan Zouhar, Songqin Pan, Julia Plotnikova, Hailing Jin, Manuel Paneque, José Juan Sánchez-Serrano, Barbara Baker, Frederick M. Ausubel, and Natasha V. Raikhel
Current Biology, 2004, Volume 14, Number 21, Page 1897
Ludier K. Santos-Silva, Andrea Soares-Costa, Lee T.S. Gerald, Silvana P. Meneghin, and Flavio Henrique-Silva
Plant Physiology and Biochemistry, 2012, Volume 57, Page 181
Sékou Bah, Berit S. Paulsen, Drissa Diallo, and Harald T. Johansen
Journal of Ethnopharmacology, 2006, Volume 107, Number 2, Page 189
Klaus Müntz, Frank R. Blattner, and Andrei D. Shutov
Journal of Plant Physiology, 2002, Volume 159, Number 12, Page 1281
Martin Horn, Martina Nussbaumerová, Miloslav Šanda, Zuzana Kovářová, Jindřich Srba, Zdeněk Franta, Daniel Sojka, Matthew Bogyo, Conor R. Caffrey, Petr Kopáček, and Michael Mareš
Chemistry & Biology, 2009, Volume 16, Number 10, Page 1053
Ernst J. Woltering
Trends in Plant Science, 2004, Volume 9, Number 10, Page 469
Klaus Müntz and Andrei D Shutov
Trends in Plant Science, 2002, Volume 7, Number 8, Page 340
G. Schwarz, J. Brandenburg, M. Reich, T. Burster, C. Driessen, and H. Kalbacher
Biological Chemistry, 2002, Volume 383, Number 11
Lenka Grunclová, Martin Horn, Marie Vancová, Daniel Sojka, Zdeněk Franta, Michael Mareš, and Petr Kopáček
Biological Chemistry, 2006, Volume 387, Number 12
Amanda D. Gillon, Ivana Saska, Cameron V. Jennings, Rosemary F. Guarino, David J. Craik, and Marilyn A. Anderson
The Plant Journal, 2007, Volume 53, Number 3, Page 505
Vitalie I. Rotari, Rui He, and Patrick Gallois
Physiologia Plantarum, 2005, Volume 123, Number 4, Page 376

Comments (0)

Please log in or register to comment.
Log in